4.2 Article

Human embryonic stem cells and derived contractile embryoid bodies are susceptible to Coxsakievirus B infection and respond to interferon I beta treatment

期刊

STEM CELL RESEARCH
卷 6, 期 1, 页码 13-22

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scr.2010.09.002

关键词

-

资金

  1. Agencia Nacional de Promocion Cientifica y Tecnologica (ANPCyT) [PID2007-00112, PICT 07-00642, PICT 07-00028]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We studied the susceptibility of human embryonic stem cells and derived contractile embryoid bodies from WAO9, HUES-5 and HUES-16 cell lines to Coxsackievirus B infection. After validating stem cell-like properties and cardiac phenotype, Coxsackievirus B receptors CAR and DAF, as well as type I interferon receptors were detected in all cell lines and differentiation stages studied. Real-time PCR analysis showed that CAR mRNA levels were 3.4-fold higher in undifferentiated cells, white DAF transcript levels were 2.78-fold more abundant in differentiated cultures (P<0.05). All cell lines were susceptible to Coxsackievirus serotypes B1-5 infection as shown by RT-PCR detection of viral RNA, immunofluorescence detection of viral protein and infectivity titration of cell culture supernatants resulting in cell death. Supernatants infectivity titers 24-48 h post-infection ranged from 10(5)-10(6) plaque forming units (PFU)/ml, the highest titers were detected in undifferentiated cells. Cell viability detected by a colorimetric assay, showed inverse correlation with infectivity titers of cell culture supernatants. Treatment with 100 U of interferon I beta significantly reduced viral replication and associated cell death during a 24-48 h observation period, as detected by reduced infectivity titers in the supernatants and increased cell viability by a colorimetric assay, respectively. We propose human embryonic stem cell and derived contractile embryoid bodies as a valid model to study cardiac Coxsackievirus B infection. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据